Knowing what not to post…

ARCHIVES 2012

By admin-s On Nov 4, 2012

Does an alleged crime repeated often enough become the truth?

I personally believe that a democracy should allow vigorous debate. The debate we want is the voice of reason, not the strident arguments that reverberate with dissent for the sake of automatically dissenting with your opponent or automatically agreeing to everything “your” side says.

Dave Avran, Free Malaysia Today

With the elections looming large, there is simply too much politicking today. This has trickled down to involve everything that occurs now, including crime.

The catalyst for this phenomenon is social media, which has enabled everyone with a smartphone to scan the news and pass instant judgment on current issues.

However, social media has a Jeckyll and Hyde personality. If you are constantly aware and use it consciously, you are safe. Overstep the boundries and you pay dearly.

I am referring to my previous article “What is wrong with our judges” where I highlighted the unhappiness and anger expressed by many Malaysians via social media channels (including MARAH) over the lenient sentences for rapists with “bright” futures in contrast to the death sentence meted out to two Indonesian brothers who killed a violent burgler, R Khartic, in self defense.

You now have Khartic’s father VP Rajah emerging to say that he is a licensed money changer, a plantation business owner and a mini market operator who paid his son RM10k a month in salary and commissions.

He is very upset that his son has been labelled a burglar and has defended his son as a good man and a registered organ donor.

Despite eyewitnesses claiming that Khartic entered the shoplot unit through an opening in the ceiling, Rajah is accusing investigating officer ASP Zaiharul and the deputy public prosecutor Yusof Rahman of working in cahoots with the shop operator to pin the blame on his son, and has counter claimed to have witnesses including his brother-in-law who saw Khartic being dragged upstairs of the shophouse by four men.

Here are the obvious questions. If there was a fracas of sorts and Khartic was dragged upstairs, why didn’t anybody (including the brother-in-law) come to his aid or call the cops?

The Indonesian brothers were the only ones who testified in their own defense. Why didn’t any of these witnesses step up to vouch for Khartic?

Here’s another question. Who do we, Joe and Jane public, believe?

Clearly, there is manipulation of social media channels to form public opinion. Whilst Malaysians are quick in assuming that there are always hidden hands in every picture, we are also quick to judge on issues.

A scan of the comments section indicates an outpouring of sympathy for the father and hate for the designated bad guys – the police.

Have we had all the complete facts of the case to mull over and evaluate before commenting?

Vigorous debate

Apparently today you must take a side, otherwise how are we know which team you are playing for? The diplomatic art of agreeing to disagree is dead today’s sociopolitical climate.